- Joined
- May 6, 2016
- Messages
- 1,908
- Reaction score
- 489
- Location
- Colorado
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
It seems pretty difficult to determine who has the moral high ground in Israel considering how much both sides leave out. Ask a christian or jew and they'll tell you that the IDF is only trying to protect Irael and that the palestinians don't want peace and just want to destroy israel. Muslims will usually tell you that the palestinians are victims of discrimination and will sometimes compare Israel's actions to nazi germany's policies on jews or the apartheid regime which ruled south africa until the early 90s (I'm not the one comparing them to either of those 2 things; do not take this sentence out of context).
Often the best solution to when 2 sides declare themselves as victims and demonize the other side, we can take the middle ground so what do we actually find?
On the palestinian side, we find 2 factions: Fatah and Hamas. The former wants an independent state and seems to be more willing to ccooperate with Israel while the latter is a designated terrorist organization which has sworn to destroy the jewish state (they take it a step further and deny the holocaust).
On the other side, we find Israel. On the freedom index, Israel has the highest scores higher than any middle eastern or arab country, followed by tunisia then turkey. They by far, excel the rest of the middle east in religious freedom While in most of the middle east, christians and atheists will face discrimination, in Israel The IDF also withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and have done a very good job in protecting Israeli citizens from terrorists. On the other hand, the IDF tends to go too far in protecting Israelites. Discrimination is quite prevailant; although there are laws against racism, it has not prevented the Israeli government from Israel has been accused of building settlements in the west bank. In fact, the IDF controls a majority of the west bank.
For there to be peace in Israel both sides must do a few things.
Israel:
Pass laws similar to the civil rights act and end eminent domain abuse
discontinue the construction of jewish settlements. The currently existing settlements must be converted into open cities
be willing to grant citizenship to palestinians in return for obtaining all of the west bank and end military rule there
If fatah is very uncooperative with the idea of annexation in return for equality then Israel must grant the west bank full autonomy. The IDF will still be allowed to have bases there but they will only be there to prevent terrorists. Jerusalem cannot be divided. The West Bank wall is a symbol of the segregation between the Jewish Israel and the Muslim west bank. It runs through Jerusalem and it divides it in half. In order for there to be peace, Netanyahu must tear down this wall.
topple the hamas regime, deindoctrinate the children, and be willing to grant the residents of gaza citizenship.
Palestinians:
prominent palestinian figures must denounce hamas as a terrorist organization.
end antisemitism and calls to destroy israel
the PNA police force must effectively contain terrorism
If these conditions can be achieved, Israel will have a very good relationship with Palestine especially considering that the Arab League refuses to grant Palestinian refugees citizenship.
why on earth do you think Israelis want to annex the entire west bank ???
why do you think Palestinians will want this?
And which Palestinian territories are, in your opinion, part of Israel now? What do you reckon Gaza is (for instance), Israeli?How about establishing a Pal. homeland that isn't part of Israel?? There's lots of land that is historically Palestinian that could be put to use for this purpose, so why not let Israel have it's little sliver of land and pour a bunch of oil $$$ into building a new and better Pal. homeland that would be even better than Israel??
It seems pretty difficult to determine who has the moral high ground in Israel considering how much both sides leave out. Ask a christian or jew and they'll tell you that the IDF is only trying to protect Irael and that the palestinians don't want peace and just want to destroy israel. Muslims will usually tell you that the palestinians are victims of discrimination and will sometimes compare Israel's actions to nazi germany's policies on jews or the apartheid regime which ruled south africa until the early 90s (I'm not the one comparing them to either of those 2 things; do not take this sentence out of context).
Often the best solution to when 2 sides declare themselves as victims and demonize the other side, we can take the middle ground so what do we actually find?
On the palestinian side, we find 2 factions: Fatah and Hamas. The former wants an independent state and seems to be more willing to ccooperate with Israel while the latter is a designated terrorist organization which has sworn to destroy the jewish state (they take it a step further and deny the holocaust).
On the other side, we find Israel. On the freedom index, Israel has the highest scores higher than any middle eastern or arab country, followed by tunisia then turkey. They by far, excel the rest of the middle east in religious freedom While in most of the middle east, christians and atheists will face discrimination, in Israel The IDF also withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and have done a very good job in protecting Israeli citizens from terrorists. On the other hand, the IDF tends to go too far in protecting Israelites. Discrimination is quite prevailant; although there are laws against racism, it has not prevented the Israeli government from Israel has been accused of building settlements in the west bank. In fact, the IDF controls a majority of the west bank.
For there to be peace in Israel both sides must do a few things.
Israel:
Pass laws similar to the civil rights act and end eminent domain abuse
discontinue the construction of jewish settlements. The currently existing settlements must be converted into open cities
be willing to grant citizenship to palestinians in return for obtaining all of the west bank and end military rule there
If fatah is very uncooperative with the idea of annexation in return for equality then Israel must grant the west bank full autonomy. The IDF will still be allowed to have bases there but they will only be there to prevent terrorists. Jerusalem cannot be divided. The West Bank wall is a symbol of the segregation between the Jewish Israel and the Muslim west bank. It runs through Jerusalem and it divides it in half. In order for there to be peace, Netanyahu must tear down this wall.
topple the hamas regime, deindoctrinate the children, and be willing to grant the residents of gaza citizenship.
Palestinians:
prominent palestinian figures must denounce hamas as a terrorist organization.
end antisemitism and calls to destroy israel
the PNA police force must effectively contain terrorism
If these conditions can be achieved, Israel will have a very good relationship with Palestine especially considering that the Arab League refuses to grant Palestinian refugees citizenship.
And which Palestinian territories are, in your opinion, part of Israel now? What do you reckon Gaza is (for instance), Israeli?
Which lands, while we're at it, are "historically" Palestinian anyway?
Just so as not to be misunderstood, I'm not prone to use any historical or religious claims as justification on who is to have what in that particular M.E. conflict. That "hesitation" would extend to any settlements being made by whoever (here Israel).View attachment 67205471
This image proves that there are several israeli settlements and that the PNA has only half of the west bank.
And on the subject of who the land belongs to, the Jewish revolt in 70 AD is what led to many jews leaving europe. In the 600s, the caliphate gained control of the land of palestine. Before you use that as a justification for the Israeli government to continue with settlements, keep in mind the composition of the United states. Using your logic, we should cede Arizona, California, New mexico, and Texas to Mexico because it used to belong to them. We should also give Oklahoma back to the Sioux indians. Do you really want America to withdraw back to its original 13 states because the rest of America is historically native american?
. With me insinuating in the process that both West Bank and Gaza might be deemed as such already by their respective inhabitants.There's lots of land that is historically Palestinian
And which Palestinian territories are, in your opinion, part of Israel now? What do you reckon Gaza is (for instance), Israeli?
Which lands, while we're at it, are "historically" Palestinian anyway?
Palestine was never a country. It has no historical claims.
the arabs lived in the land of palestine longer than we americans lived in america. Using your logic, the USA should be replaced by countries belonging to native americans since the land historically belonged to them
Arabs, not Palestinians. And Arabs were nomads.
then we're not americans, we're europeans. Also, arabs who lived in major cities such as Damascus or Baghdad could hardly be considered nomadic, even before oil was discovered.
I meant in exchange for being treated as equals. There's also the full autonomy solution
again with the equals, Palestinians want independence, not being Israeli. Israeli Arabs are treated as equals.
what do you define as full autonomy?
Palestinians have autonomy since the Oslo accords
the arabs lived in the land of palestine longer than we americans lived in america. Using your logic, the USA should be replaced by countries belonging to native americans since the land historically belonged to them
Prior to 1964 the Arabs in Palestine called themselves "citizens of Greater Syria".
Here's what I read about the term "Palestinian".
Think-Israel
If you have a pre-1964 source that refers to "Palestinians", I would like to see it.
American Indians have a history that goes way before 1964.
Syria virtually owned Lebanon not all that long ago (having practically taken it over).makes you wonder why the governments of syria, Iraq, and Lebannon never tried to join together
full autonomy would grant the PNA full authority over the west bank (Except jerusalem; they share the entire city with Israel) but the IDF can still exercise dominion under probable cause of terrorism (it's like the 4th amendment). It will ultimately be the PNA's responsibility to maintain order and stomp out terrorism in Palestine but if they fail to do so then the IDF can intervene. Anti ballistic missile systems would fire a missile if a rocket entered the airspace of Israel or Palestine. The construction of Israeli settlements would discontinue and the existing settlements would be converted into open cities for the palestinians.
You are describing the Oslo accords, thats the situation today
but israel is building a wall along the west bank and divides Jerusalem. They are also building settlements and although they are illegal under international law, the UN has done nothing
Palestine was never a country. It has no historical claims.
Neither was most of the Middle East, or indeed the world untill very recently (1). ´countries´ are a very new phenomena. I´ve no idea why such an absurd non sequitur is allowed to persist.
1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l53bmKYXliA
Syria virtually owned Lebanon not all that long ago (having practically taken it over).
not sure whether you actually didn't mean Hezbollah.They surely planted Hamas; so say my Lebanese friends.
Syria virtually occupied Lebanon for almost 30 years.can you expand on the ownership thing? I know that French influence was very heavy there, and they were the garden country for a long long time.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?